The MM Community has steadily gotten worse

Yeah I know, invasion is by far the worst. People will quit from games in invasion for the most pathetic reasons...Dying, losing a tier, not getting to a power weapon first, a high rank on the other team and/or a map they don't like just to name a few. And NOBODY talks.

As for the psych profiles. It first tries to match players with matching psych profiles, then tries to match people with "no preference" with anybody, even if the people they're joining DO have a preference.

Also people generally set their profile to chatty, team player and polite even if they are no-mics, team f***er-overs and brainless. Simply because those settings increase THEIR chances of joining a good team.

Then the are party chatters, or teamates with mics who just sit there the whole game not saying a word.

And halo 3 was better for team players, you needed half a brain to play it and the fact that the game bribed you with xp to help your team helped as well.

In short, blame the psych profile system, the xp system, the party system, the lack of trueskill matching system and the community.

 

- Blame parents spoiling their children rotten.
- Blame the gaming industry for stat tracking and putting emphasis on kill/death ratios.
- Blame Bungie for giving us too much customization for game types... as well as too many game types.

Unfortunately this new generation of spoiled kids really ruins gaming. They don't get their way, so they spoil it for others. They have a bad game so they quit... or commit suicide... or report you... or betray you... or keep knocking down your shields... or knocking you out of your sniper's nest... or whatever.

To be honest, if anyone needs to be banned... it's these people that show those types of habits repeatedly. Yes numbers will drop significantly... but the remaining community will be the greatest of any game.

All that I do when I play is spend time after every game and give every player a review. If they're horrible, then I make sure I gave them a horrible review to reduce my chances of being stuck with them in the future. It's all you can do.

 

On the topic of people quitting in Reach MM, I blame the new credit system of ranking up.

In Halo 3, to rank up a player gained Exp (experience points) by WINNING games. Anyone who quit would not only instantly lose out on an opportunity to gain exp, but exp would be deducted from then player's cumulative tally.

Though many said the system was flawed and poor, it successfully ensured that:
A) Higher ranked people were generally better
B) The amount of in-game quits was kept very low
C) MM games involved more teamwork in a more competitive nature.

With the new (credit) system players often find no obligation to stay in games, usually just getting challanges/commendations then leaving. Though bungie/343i have changed the system to offer a higher payout for completing games, people still quit.

I think the best way to teach a player not to do so is to provide negative punishment for the bad, instead of positive reinforcement for the good.

Ex: Say a player receives 2000 Cr for finishing a game. Players really don't care about the small bonus at the end so they can, and often will, quit. If say a system was implemented where you lose 5000 Cr for quitting (discounting betrayal boots and lag-outs) then the 'quit rate' would drop substantially.

 

The problem with Reach's cR system is that cR payouts are heavily determined by game length. All they need to do is adjust the formula to increase the payout based on winning, completing objectives, and individual performance.

Quitting should yield 0 cR payout. Unfortunately, this isn't really true... especially when it comes to challenge completing.

As for negative punishment... I don't agree with that. What's to stop players from creating a separate account to just keep going negative? We all know it would happen. Kids are spoiled and will do whatever they can to ruin other people's experiences. It's really that bad and pathetic out there.

 

Called a player review. If you don't like em, give em a negative review and then pray to God you don't get stuck with them. Lets just hope you don't give so many people negative rep that you don't have any people to play with.

 

I actually may be pretty close to that point with Firefight players. I give bad reviews to any suicide grunt type players who just keep running in, exploding everything, dying, and respawning. If we're playing Rocketfight or FRG Fight and you die more than 3 times, you suck and get a bad review.

Unfortunately just when I hope to get through all the players so I can start playing with decent player more frequently... more morons play.

 

Halo 3 was pretty much the same system exp for winning no exp for losing(ranked system doesn't matter), If i remember correctly the only difference was each playlist had there own rank and whoever played the most had a higher rank.

I hope you don't have kids if you think negative punishment is better then positive reinforcement.

Player psych profile is a very rough guide, Connection and a lot of other things come before hand it will try to match you with players you want but don't expect it to then be upset when it doesn't

I dunno if people will agree with me but I blame party chat and mute ban for the lack of mics. I wish turning the "Chatty" option didn't allow party chat or people who have been mute banned and you had to have a mic.

That's pretty bad, Unless your playing with lives then that's reasonable but games without lives you HAVE TO rush in and get and steal as many kills as possible to get the highest score which is how you Win those types of firefight games.

 

But... that actually wasn't true. I don't have stats, but in-game quits were a huge, endemic problem in Halo 3, and continue to be in Reach. People didn't give a crap about not getting XP, or the -1 XP for a quit. And why would they? If you play twenty games, win ten, and quit out of five (which is a LOT of quitting) you still come out 5 points ahead on the day. And plenty of players didn't give a crap about ranking up anyway. I see quitting as a continuing problem in Reach, not a new one. Up until recently, I played most of my matchmaking games with all randoms, and it was a very rare game in both 3 and Reach that every player on both teams would finish the game.

The real problems, IMO, are these:

1. There's no positive reinforcement sufficient for really getting people to stop quitting. Tiny little credit jackpot bonuses don't mean anything once you get out of your Warrant Officer days, and that's provided you even care about ranking up or buying armor, which lots of people don't. If they gave people something really cool like some custom armor for maintaining a certain low percentage of quits, and TOOK IT AWAY when you went above that percentage, that might help with some players. But ultimately I think you'll just have way too many casual players who simply don't care. They play Halo one game at a time; they don't concern themselves with rank, stats, armor, or anything else; and it is damn hard to encourage them in any way toward better game behavior. Those same kinds of players make up the majority of the quitters, griefers, suicide bombers, etc.

2. There's no punishment that's worth bothering about either. I'm glad they instituted some kind of quit ban (I suggested it repeatedly in Halo 3). Best case scenario is that people stop quitting out so they don't get banned, and at the worst it prevents them from quitting more games during their brief ban periods. But Bungie understandably doesn't want to truly drive people away from buying and playing their games, and therefore any kind of quit ban will always be a light slap on the wrist rather than something would be truly meaningful to them. Like say, you quit out of 30% of your games for a week, and you spend the next week not being able to play and thinking about why you're such a twat.

3. As for people playing without mics and not using any kind of teamwork or common sense, that just goes back to the kind of players that make up the bulk of the community. And honestly I don't see how this has changed since 3 either. You have screaming kids, ****-talking tryhards, trolls and griefers. If you play with randoms you are damn lucky to get a game where people aren't shrieking racial epithets and obscenities at each other or you. For a long time I played with my mic off and everybody muted because it made the games more pleasant (read: actually tolerable). Lately I've been doing a lot more matchmaking with friends and that is a marked improvement. But when I do play with randoms, I still mute all. I don't need a 12 year old singing me a song, calling me a f____ n_____, or whatever else because he hasn't had his Ritalin and doesn't get enough attention from the West Baltimore school system.

 

Nutduster...I love you. Totally agree with you, and I could not have worded it half as well.

No company is going to punish them too hard as that drives away customers, even the obnoxious players they are. Really casual players won't do anything with an incentive, and those are the majority of the quitters. Maybe if quitters got matched more frequently with other quitters, and those who just endure get matched with like-minded players at least the innocent part of the community would not have to deal with those players, but again, that might drive away players as those who quit will never really have a full game and will have even less of an experience.

 

No... you don't. I frequently get the highest score because if you had any brains, you'd realize that your multiplier increases for surviving longer in Firefight. I generally survive the entire game without dying. Ever notice at the end of a game that one player may score 100-200 more points than another against the same type of opponent? That's because one player was on a longer kill streak without dying... and making it to the bonus round without dying makes grunt killing much more profitable in points. I've frequently gone from 3rd to 1st due to the multiplier bonus per grunt killed.

I play smart and would rather play with other smart players. Keep that random, mindless spamming bullshit in custom games with your buddies. While everyone else is spamming away mindlessly at the first wave, I'm building fortifications to keep elites coming at me in the later waves.

 

I hope you're never in a occupation of influence when you compare changing trends in videogame players to bringing up children.

I also hope you're not a pshchologist.

 

Win

Unfortunately the only way to really prevent the quitting problem is to allow people to join mid game. It's unfortunate that there's no way to keep a full party through a game, but I'd rather play with full teams of changing players the entire time than with half teams of the same players. Unfortunately with everyones focus on instant gratification there's no way people will stop quitting, so the best we can do is remove them or prevent the situation from messing with the game. Of course bungie could make a set of no quit playlists from which you get banned for the day after quitting once.

 

Honestly, I think the best thing to do is give players 3 strikes per playlist. 3rd strike is a 24 hour ban from a playlist... from the time of the 3rd quit. That allows for 2 network issues. If you have more than that... then you should get your connection checked anyways. The strikes also include inactivity bans. Play the game or go elsewhere.

I'd love a day when all the quitters were out of a playlist.

 

I've gone many games without dieing I prefer not to die, I didn't know you got points for longer kill streaks I've always thought you get points for killing sprees(the badges) and if you kill on a enemy and that kill grants a killings spree it gave you an extra 200 points and any badge earned during that kill adds to the points.

I'm not saying i like rushing in firefight I prefer life games because there is less rushing. But I've found if I don't have a sniper MY best option to get the most points is to rush the front lines staying alive. Not just running in getting a double kill kamikaze then respawning and repeating.
(Even though I said I will "kill steal" everyone does, I personally try not to yoink lol)

I'm not comparing anything, My query was with your comment

And I think whenever there's an option Positive reinforcement is almost always better then negative punishment and apparently some guy called Burrhus Frederic Skinner who was the Edgar Pierce Professor of Psychology at Harvard University who seems to be somewhat of an authority in the subject and is a Professor of Psychology has the same opinion.
"As Skinner discussed, positive reinforcement is superior to punishment in altering behavior. He maintained that punishment was not simply the opposite of positive reinforcement; positive reinforcement results in lasting behavioral modification, whereas punishment changes behavior only temporarily and presents many detrimental side effects."[W]

The ultimate goal is to stop people quitting. Skinner says positive reinforcement results in lasting behavioral modification and we want to modify the behavior so people who might quit wont quit so positive reinforcement is a better solution.

Though there is both positive reinforcements(credit bonus) and negative punishment(quit ban) that serve the purpose of accomplishing this goal in Reach.

 

That's why I said this...

By having game length determine cR payouts, they caused the idling/AFC boosting dilemna. It gave payouts for doing nothing but being in games.

If primary bonus is fixed on winning, secondary bonus is fixed on objectives, then remaining payout fixed on performance... I think that could completely change things around. People would have incentive to not only win, but perform well. Otherwise it would take them forever to reach Inheritor.

If this type of payout system were implemented in the beginning, it wouldn't make the cR ranking system a complete joke to those 1-50 lovers. People that win, complete objectives, and perform well would earn more cR per game and thus rank up faster than those that quit, idled, and just plain sucked. This system also allows casual players the chance to eventually reach the top, although they'd have to play significantly more games than better players. The cream of the crop would rise to the top faster... and eventually get watered down... but the longer the game is out, the fewer number of players, and the more difficult it is to get competitive games anyways.

 

I really hate how almost all players are retarded kids or x c4MpiNg P0wEr We4p0Nz X HoGg3rz and i even hardly get decent players while i send at least 3 negative player reviews per game.

 

Why do people always act like communities were so great in the past? Even back in the days there were tons of grievers, quitter, hackers and all that ****. People were douche-bags back then just like they are right now. Just because you ran into them twice in a row instead of your normal one time in a row doesn't mean anything has changed.

 

This, totally. The MM community hasn't gotten any worse, its just everyone was a little nicer than usual while having fun getting used to a new game. Now that Reach is kind of old hat, its like halo 3 around late 2008. **** talking goes up, quitting goes up, betraying goes up, cause everyone is now used to the game and what is has to offer.

that's how I see it anyway.